SAASFO you wrote:
Then Starcrest replied:

Now. Having seen what Starcrest wrote about the length of the skidmarks and having seen the photo's of how far and deep the nosegear plowed into the dirt I have to say that I found your account of things highly improbable. Thats a helluva long way to make a nosewheel skid after an application of power from a deadstop. If as you say the power was applied from a dead stop and given that the skidmarks start from the centerline I would say that the captain should have had more than ample time to realise the aircraft was not turning as required and react to that by simply applying the brakes.

I would suspect that things happened far more rapidly than what you suggest. The 600 has quite a bit of inertia. I cannot see how simply starting a turn from a deadstop would result in the aircraft leaving the tarmac. Unless the power applied was TOGA thrust.

How can you be so sure of the sequence of events? Did you speak to the crew involved or did you get your info secondhand?

Let's just say that I did not get the info secondhand, so the other option is ........

You were P2 or P3, maybe PPax?

I just reiterate that those skid marks definitely begin from the RW01 centre line. So I also find your stationary claim puzzling. If the airie was standing still what on earth would make the skipper use near TOGA thrust to get it moving?

Some key fact is missing??????

The skid marks on the runway or on the Captains chair?

Think they're still trying to surgically remove the seat cushion from the captain's bottom.:ooh: The report re the skidmarks on the cushion will be released when someone eventually manages to take a look at them.

nws tiller?
 

Four scenarios spring to mind:

1. The tiller push-button was malfunctioning and the nosewheel did not respond due to incorrect imputs from the tiller (maybe the tiller thought it was disconnected because of an incorrect signal) -technical-

2. The tiller push-button was unintentionally depressed in the heat of the moment. -human-

3. Maybe the turn was made with too much speed and a slight distraction caused a lack a monitoring of the groundspeed and the nose wheels started skidding even though the tiller was turned. Speeds greater than 10 kts are too great for 90-180° turns (especially when wet). Even on a dry runway this causes slight skidding. -human-

4. What SAASFO says. -human-

It happens to the best and will happen again, maybe to you, maybe to me. Seeking blame doesn't assist in the matter, finding out why it happened will help us to avoid making the same mistake. Obviously there'll be consequences, but that's a different matter. Happy taxiing.

Starcrest and AirwayBlocker, how about a night on you at High Flyerz for everyone there if I am right when the report comes out, and on me if I am wrong?? :rolleyes:

As long as P and L promise to keep the loud and obnoxious music that seems to be turned up just as one is getting into a great mood, to a minimum for that night!!

Glass Houses
 

Accidents/incidents are always a CHAIN of events leading to a pile of poop.

Why did the FO not tell the captain that the ATIS, which he copied, advised taxiway A1 was closed (even after it was included in the after landing part of the briefing)? What part did he play in the confusion after landing when the ATC suddenly told them to turn right on RWY 16 while completing the landing roll? Would any of this have happened if the facts had been at the captain's disposal?

While no-one disputes that the captain carries the final responsibility, I think a bit of brown stuff may have attached itself to the FO too!!!

:cool:

Of course, lazy, you are assuming that SAASFO was the P2 on this flight?
Assumptions are always dangerous.:rolleyes:

Nice editing there, lazy, or should that be lady? I see that you have changed all references to SAASFO to FO.
Is this just wishful thinking?:confused:
Anyway, it is usually best to stick to the facts when unfortunate incidents happen.

Folks, I was not the FO on that flight. In fact, I am not even on that fleet. But my understanding is that the Captain is blaming the FO for not telling her that taxiway A1 was broadcast as closed on the ATIS. The FO assumed that A1 referred to the stand A1, but I agree that this should have been mentioned when he read her the ATIS. However, that is one aspect of the incident, and a very small aspect at that, but taking a handful of thrust and driving an A340-600 off the runway into the dirt is an entirely more serious aspect and one that will be very hard to justify.

Did the Captain not read the Notams before departure? I`m pretty sure that if this was done during the Briefing, there would not have been any confusion as to the closure of A1:ugh::mad:
If there had been a P3 on this sector, the Captain would have been up to speed with the domestic Notams prior to the landing.:ok::ok:
And they want to reduce a P3`s salary !:=

I am glad to hear that SAASFO, otherwise you would have been guilty of breaking the cardinal rule of CRM; bleating about fellow crew in public (and before the enquiry is done). That established, you seem very sure of the sequence of events, seems perhaps that either the P1, P2 or P3 confided in you. Let's scratch the P1 as I think perhaps you have an issue with the skipper, as your thread would indicate..

That very small aspect you refer to is the FO muddling an ATIS message that clearly warns "Taxiway Alpha is closed" and interpreting it as "Parking Bay Alpha is closed" ??

The skipper, guilty of not remembering the Notam, may have been lulled into anticipating an easy exit onto 34 (only a 30 degree turn) added to which is a bad ATC bad habit of sometimes referring to 16 as 34.

An accident/incident investigation is like analysing vegetable soup, many little parts make up the whole. It seems, from armchair length anyway, that poor CRM may be one piece of the vegetable.

could have been worse, check this out!

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1293784

Dog

OOpss A346's!!
 

What is happening with A 346's recently??

Anyone care to have this raging debate snuffed out by the CVR transcripts?:E:E

Definitely!

Although having done some more enquiring I'm tending to believe that SAASFO has the closer version to the truth.

Apparently the aircraft did come to a stop before being powered off the runway onto (or should that be into) the dirt.

I won't begin to speculate as to why though. At least not until I've seen the transcripts. :E:}

As it contains some language unbecomming, I will first have to have it censored.:E:suspect:

I.R.Pirate post away! If you really have the cvr transcripts then all speculation ends.:O

Yeah, let's see the transcript so we can see whether it was a sequence of events, or a fit of pique, or both??